alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                     189,119,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                              357,810,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   589,000
<INVENTORY>                                154,554,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           700,894,000
<PP&E>                                      13,809,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,542,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             710,161,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      159,105,000
<BONDS>                                    288,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        18,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 263,038,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               710,161,000
<SALES>                                    155,669,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           155,669,000
<CGS>                                       14,234,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               14,234,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            81,859,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            16,932,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          15,187,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             27,457,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                13,807,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                13,650,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .73
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .68
        

</TABLE>
Center for Veterinary Biologics

Inspection and Compliance

Inspection and Compliance

Director

Supvy Microbiologist

Renee Schnurr

Program Support Assistant

Vacant

Compliance

Section Leader

Supvy Microbiologist

Douglas Murtle 

Inspection

Section Leader

Supvy Microbiologist

Kendall Graber

Sr Biologics Epidemiologist

Veterinary Medical Officer

John Bare

John Schiltz

Investigation Manager

Biological Scientist

Teri Thiele

Facilities Manager

Microbiologist

Danielle Koski

Product Manager

Animal Scientist

Jeanette Watson

Lead Bio Complnc Asst 

OA

Vacant

Bio Compliance Asst 

OA

Lisa Ashburn

Zahra Bond

Vacant

Safety & Security Unit

Unit Manager

Robert Stoker

Investigation and 

Compliance Specialist

Samuel Burdess

Student Trainee (Clk)

Vacant

Export Manager

Microbiologist

Ruben Osorio

Biologics Specialist

Veterinary Medical Officer

Kurt Kreutzer

Biologics Specialist

Biological Scientist

Brian Campbell

Annette Gomez

Brandalyn Heathcote

Tracy Oleson

Mindy Powell

Biologics Specialist

Biological Scientist

Brian Campbell

Annette Gomez

Brandalyn Heathcote

Tracy Oleson

Mindy Powell

Biologics Specialist

Biological Scientist

Michelle Harland

Vacant

Vacant

Biologics Specialist

Veterinary Medical Officer

Kathryn Prell

Investigation and 

Compliance Specialist

Richard DeWald

12/03/2023

DB-6

Export Document 

Examiner

David Mattocks

Biologics Epidemiologist

Veterinary Medical Officer 

Kira Tyson
#### John SMITH, Jr., Plaintiff in Error, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Defendant in Error.

No. A-12974.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

Jan. 11, 1961.

See also 351 P.2d 1076 and 357 P.2d 1046.

John Smith, Jr., pro se.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Sam H. Lattimore, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.

BRETT, Judge.

This is an attempted appeal by petition in error, forma pauperis by John Smith, Jr., *244from a judgment and sentence of four years in the state penitentiary for second degree rape, on a plea of guilty, arising out of the district court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. The judgment and sentence was entered against the petitioner on May 27, 1960. The appeal by petition in error was lodged in this Court on November 29, 1960.

Under the provisions of 22 O.S. 1951 § 1054, an appeal in a felony case must be lodged in this Court within six months after the judgment and sentence is rendered, otherwise the Court of Criminal Appeals acquires no jurisdiction of the appeal, and the appeal will be dismissed. Howey v. State, 9 Okl.Cr. 453, 132 P. 499; Woods v. State, Okl.Cr., 346 P.2d 950.

The statutory provisions for perfecting appeals are matters of legislative control, and such provisions of law are mandatory. We are without authority of law to consider an appeal not taken within the time provided by law. Howey v. State, supra; Woods v. State, supra; Nail v. State, Okl.Cr., 346 P.2d 735.

The appeal having been filed herein on November 29, 1960, two days after the time allowed by statute, the same is ordered dismissed.

NIX, P. J., and BUSSEY, J., concur.
# C_2008008EN.01002301.xml

| 12.1.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 8/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 8/23

---

Action brought on 16 November 2007 — Cohausz v OHIM — Izquierdo Faces (acopat)

(Case T-409/07)

(2008/C 8/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Helge B. Cohausz (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: I. Friedhoff, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: José Izquierdo Faces (Bilbao, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the contested action [decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 6 September 2007 in Case R 289/2006-1]; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the contested action [decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 6 September 2007 in Case R 289/2006-1];

| — | order intervener and/or [OHIM] to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order intervener and/or [OHIM] to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark subject of the application for a declaration of invalidity: The figurative mark ‘acopat’ for services in classes 35 and 42 — Community trade mark No 1 643 782

Registered Community trade mark subject of the application for a declaration of invalidity:

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: José Izquierdo Faces

Proprietor of the Community trade mark:

Party requesting the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: The applicant

Party requesting the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark:

Trade mark right of the party requesting the declaration of invalidity: The national word mark ‘COPAT’ for goods and services in classes 9, 35, 41 and 42

Trade mark right of the party requesting the declaration of invalidity:

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark

Decision of the Cancellation Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the Cancellation Division's decision and dismissal of the request for a declaration of invalidity

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 56(2) and (3) of Council Regulation No 40/94 and Rules 22(2) and 40(5) of Commission Regulation No 2868/95, as the Board of Appeal incorrectly found that the national trade mark had not been used in Germany during the period 1996 to 2001.

Pleas in law:

---
REFERENCE NUMBER:

RDIMS#8632404 PAGE 1 OF 2 

HA2941 (AMENDED JULY 2, 2019) 

VETERINARY HEALTH CERTIFICATE 

FOR EXPORT OF RATITE HATCHING EGGS TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

Veterinary Authority

Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Date of Issue Certificate Number 

CERTIFICATION 

This is to certify that the animals described herein have been inspected and/or tested for the diseases specified, and conform to 

the current veterinary requirements of the importing country. 

1. Consignor: 2. Consignee:

3. Country of Origin:

CANADA 

4. Province of Origin:

5. Country of Destination:

USA 

6. State of Destination:

7. Place of Origin: 8. Port of Embarkation / Border Crossing: 

9. Date of Shipment: 10. Means of Transport: 

11. Description of Commodity: 12. Date of Veterinary Inspection:

13. Total Quantity: 14. Total Number of Containers:

15. Container Numbers

16. Commodities Intended Use:

17. Identification of Commodities: 

Species/common name Age (Months) Sex Number/amount of type 

 
REFERENCE NUMBER:

RDIMS#8632404 PAGE 2 OF 2 

HA2941 (AMENDED JULY 2, 2019) 

Veterinary Authority

Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Date of Issue Certificate Number

Certification Statements:

1. The flock of origin for hatching eggs covered under this health certificate were inspected by the veterinarian issuing the 

health certificate. 

2. The flock of origin for the hatching eggs were not vaccinated against any H5 or H7 subtype of avian influenza. 

3. The flock of origin for the hatching eggs have been vaccinated against Newcastle disease (avian paramyxovirus) at least 

21 days prior to export, using vaccines that do not contain any velogenic strains of Newcastle disease virus. 

OR 

have not been vaccinated against Newcastle disease. (strike out which does not apply). 

4. Canada is recognized by the United States as free from Newcastle Disease. 

5. Birds/hatching eggs covered by this certificate do not originate from flocks nor had contact with any birds or poultry 

originating in a control zone established by federal animal health authorities due to outbreaks of Newcastle disease or 

Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI). 

6. The flock of origin of the hatching eggs had no evidence of avian communicable disease within the 30 days prior to the 

hatching of the first egg laid for this shipment. 

7. The flock of origin for the hatching eggs were exported from an area that was not adjacent to any areas under quarantine 

during the 90 days preceding the exportation. 

8. The flock of origin of the hatching eggs were either born in Canada; or legally imported and then have resided in Canada 

for at least 90 consecutive days prior to collecting eggs to comprise the shipment. 

9. The hatching eggs were placed in new or appropriately sanitized packing containers for shipment to the United States at 

the premises where the flock of origin was kept. 

 

Date(yyyy-mm-dd) Accredited Veterinary Practitioner 

 

Name of Official Veterinarian (Printed) Signature of Official Veterinarian 

 

Date(yyyy-mm-dd)
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 5867-054]
 On September 29, 2021, Alice Falls Hydro, LLC filed an application for a 
                    ( print page 88062)
                    new license to continue to operate and maintain the 2.1-megawatt Alice Falls Hydroelectric Project No. 5867 (Alice Falls Project). On April 24, 2023, Commission staff issued a notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate the effects of relicensing the Alice Falls Project. The notice of intent included a schedule for preparing a single EA. By this notice, Commission staff is updating the procedural schedule for completing the EA. The revised schedule is shown below. Further revisions to the schedule may be made as appropriate. Milestone
Target dateIssue EA
March 2024.
 Any questions regarding this notice may be directed to Kelly Wolcott at (202) 502-6480, or by email at 
                    *kelly.wolcott@ferc.gov.* Dated: December 13, 2023. Debbie-Anne A. Reese, Deputy Secretary.


[FR Doc. 2023-27878 Filed 12-19-23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 112 (Wednesday, July 25, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1325-E1326]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

          IN RECOGNITION OF THE REOPENING OF ST. JAMES CHURCH

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 25, 2012

  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of St. James' 
Church, one of the 11

[[Page E1326]]

Cleveland Catholic Diocese parishes that will be reopening this year.
  In 2009 it was announced that several of the Cleveland Catholic 
Diocese's area churches, including St. Barbara's, were to close. 
However, just months ago, the Vatican overruled this decision and St. 
James' will be reopening its doors on Wednesday, July 25, 2012.
  St. James Church was founded in 1908 as the founding parish for the 
cities of Lakewood and Rocky River. For more than a century, St. James 
has been a house of worship and gathering for the Catholic residents of 
Lakewood, Ohio.
  After Bishop Lennon's 2009 announcement parishioners gathered 
together and formed Friends of Saint James/Save Saint James in an 
effort to stop the closing of their church. The members of Friends of 
Saint James/Save Saint James are committed to the preservation of Saint 
James as a parish and an architecturally significant structure in the 
City of Lakewood. They have dedicated themselves to the development of 
a long range financial plan for capital improvements and maintenance of 
the church and its programs.
  Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in recognizing the 
reopening of St. James' Church, a beloved parish that has returned to 
the City of Lakewood.

                          ____________________
```
Need to return call by / at/between and

. Signature: Project No.: 0 317.0 2 .005.510 Page 1 of 1

Project Name: DMR20 1 3 

### CBI?

Yes

No TELEPHONE CALL RECOR D

Incoming

Outgoing Date: 02/ 18 /15 Time: 8:29 am

pm

Company Name: US Ecology Texas Inc ERG Staff Name:

Kara Edquist

Contact Name: Celina Camarena Contact Phone Number: (361) 387

- 3518

General Subject: 2013 DMR Discharges for US Ecology Texas Inc., Robstown, TX



### TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN

On February 18 th

, 2015 at 8:29am I called the general facility number and was directed to the voicemail box of

Casey Murdock (unable to confirm spelling at this time) and left a message.

On February 18 th , 2015 at 11:47am Celina Camarena responded to my call saying the information had been

forwarded on to her. She also stated the women in charge of the DMR data had recently lef t the company so

she was going to have to check on what’s available and get back to me.

On February 25 th , 2015 at 4:11pm Ms. Camarena returned my call. She confirmed the reported data and stated

she believes there are two reasons for the larger flow reading: an issue with the flow meter was detected after a

large rainfall event (after the daily max of 4710 MGD was recorded) , so the facility had the flow meter

recalibrated on 9/24/13. Another reason is the 004 outfall is larger than the other outfalls and experiences more

flow on a normal basis anyway.

004 outfall (TX0104400): Possible faulty flow meter during large rainfall event produced higher value than i n

reality. Flow meter recalibrated and sequential months seem like a typical magnitude.
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I,John E. Bailye, certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewedthis Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Dendrite International, Inc.;

 

2.               Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.               Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.               The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.               The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

(b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

Date:November 8, 2004

 
| /s/  John E. Bailye                                 |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| John  E. Bailye                                     |
| Chairman  of the Board and  Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-03-1999
<CASH>                                           1,420
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       17
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,437
<PP&E>                                              63
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,500
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               99
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            14
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,387
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,500
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (544)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (21)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (523)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (523)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (523)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.04)
        

</TABLE>
# C_2007155EN.01003502.xml

| 7.7.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 155/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/35

---

Action brought on 8 May 2007 — ThyssenKrupp Liften v Commission

(Case T-154/07)

(2007/C 155/64)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: ThyssenKrupp Liften BV (Krimpen aan den IJssel, Netherlands) (represented by: O.W. Brouwer and A.C.E. Stoffer, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | annul the contested decision in so far as it relates to the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision in so far as it relates to the applicant;

| — | in the alternative, reduce the fine imposed on the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, reduce the fine imposed on the applicant;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant is challenging Commission Decision C(2007) 512 final (Case COMP/E-1/38.823 — PO/Elevators and Escalators).

In support of its application the applicant invokes the same pleas in law as those put forward in Case T-144/07 ThyssenKrupp Liften Ascenseurs v Commission.

ThyssenKrupp Liften Ascenseurs

Commission

The applicant also submits that, by increasing the basic amount of the fine by a deterrence factor of 100 %, the Commission infringed Article 23(1) of Regulation No 1/2003 (1) and the guidelines for setting fines based thereon (2), as well as the principles of proportionality and equality. The applicant contends further that, contrary to Article 23(1) of Regulation No 1/2003 and the guidelines on fines, the Commission imposed a 50 % increase in the fine in respect of repeat offences.

1

2

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ 2003 L 1, p. 1).

1

(2)  Commission notice: Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 15(2) of Regulation No 17 and Article 65(5) of the ECSC Treaty (OJ 1998 C 9, p. 3).

2

---